Nypd's Stop-And-Frisk Law

On October 31, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals dropped the order requiring modifications to New York’s Stop-and-Frisk Law. The execution of this measure permitted the NYPD to continue their principle of stopping and questioning pedestrians and frisking them in order to root out and prevent crime (Neumeister). The law, built off of the Broken Windows Theory, was devised to eradicate secondary crimes before they developed into more immediate offenses; thus, the NYPD aspired to dismantle the state’s conspicuous crime scene (Kirchner). However, after almost half a century since its induction in 1968, to what extent has the Stop-and-Frisk Law alleviated crime in New York? Critics of the ruling state that the NYPD’s Stop-and-Frisk Law is

Yet of that amount, 90% of those stopped were innocent - 9 in 10 citizens who were subject to the procedure were found with no evidence of wrongdoing (“Stop… State”). So what of the 10% that were caught as secondary violators? Under further examination, it was discovered that only 1.5% of stop-and-frisk arrests led to a jail or prison sentence. Additionally, of those arrested, a minor .1% resulted in a conviction for a violent crime or the possession of a weapon (Lee). This indicates that the law enables policemen to interrogate bystanders, strangers, and ordinary citizens, and all for little to no effect. The NYPD are not extinguishing crime, they are merely biding their time as authority figures, as New York’s crime rate remains stagnant. The Stop-and-Frisk Law is widely based on the foundation of assumptions and anonymous tip-offs (“Terry...Transcript)."). This matter leaves stop-and-frisk procedures vulnerable to exploitation and unreasonable suspicion. Without any solid evidence to function off of, the NYPD are deluded with the illusion that they are taking measures to stop

In 2011, African Americans made up 25% of New York’s entire population, however, documents reveal that African Americans were the alleged suspects of 53% of all Stop-and-Frisk procedures. Similarly, Hispanics made up 29% of New York’s population, yet they were the victims of 34% of the NYPD’s Stop-and-Frisk Law. In the same year, Caucasian New Yorkers made up at least 33% of the state’s population, yet only a mere 9% were stopped and frisked by policemen (Flatow…”Ten). Prominent NYPD official, Chief Esposito, and defenders of the Stop-and-Frisk refute with the claim that “those who fit the general race, gender, and age profile of… criminal suspects… should be particularly targeted for stops”; they state that African Americans and Hispanics are rightfully and legally the targets of the Stop-and-Frisk (Flatow…”Five). This irrational behavior imparts how quick NYPD officers are to base their stops on race alone. Yet contradictory to profiled beliefs, minorities do not make up the main perpetrators of secondary crimes. Statistics point out that, “the likelihood a stop of an African American...yield[ing] a weapon [is] half that of [a] white New Yorker”. One in every 49 stops of Caucasians revealed a weapon, while it took one in every 71 stops of Hispanics and one in every 93 stops of African Americans to achieve such a feat. In addition